TSTP Solution File: ALG298^5 by E---3.1.00

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : E---3.1.00
% Problem  : ALG298^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_E %s %d THM

% Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit  : 300s
% DateTime : Mon May 20 18:06:03 EDT 2024

% Result   : Theorem 0.20s 0.51s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.20s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    7
%            Number of leaves      :   13
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   25 (  10 unt;  12 typ;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   25 (  24 equ;   0 cnn)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    5 (   1 avg)
%            Number of connectives :  142 (   3   ~;   0   |;  10   &; 127   @)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   2  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   4 avg)
%            Number of types       :    3 (   3 usr)
%            Number of type conns  :   16 (  16   >;   0   *;   0   +;   0  <<)
%            Number of symbols     :   11 (   9 usr;   3 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   43 (   0   ^  41   !;   2   ?;  43   :)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thf(decl_sort1,type,
    c: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort2,type,
    b: $tType ).

thf(decl_sort3,type,
    a: $tType ).

thf(decl_22,type,
    c_starc: c > c > c ).

thf(decl_23,type,
    c_starb: b > b > b ).

thf(decl_24,type,
    c_stara: a > a > a ).

thf(decl_25,type,
    esk1_0: a > b ).

thf(decl_26,type,
    esk2_0: a > c ).

thf(decl_27,type,
    esk3_0: b > c ).

thf(decl_28,type,
    esk4_1: b > a ).

thf(decl_29,type,
    esk5_0: b ).

thf(decl_30,type,
    esk6_0: b ).

thf(cTHM270_pme,conjecture,
    ! [X1: a > b,X2: a > c,X3: b > c] :
      ( ( ! [X4: a] :
            ( ( X3 @ ( X1 @ X4 ) )
            = ( X2 @ X4 ) )
        & ! [X5: b] :
          ? [X4: a] :
            ( ( X1 @ X4 )
            = X5 )
        & ! [X4: a,X6: a] :
            ( ( X1 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
            = ( c_starb @ ( X1 @ X4 ) @ ( X1 @ X6 ) ) )
        & ! [X4: a,X7: a] :
            ( ( X2 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X7 ) )
            = ( c_starc @ ( X2 @ X4 ) @ ( X2 @ X7 ) ) ) )
     => ! [X8: b,X5: b] :
          ( ( X3 @ ( c_starb @ X8 @ X5 ) )
          = ( c_starc @ ( X3 @ X8 ) @ ( X3 @ X5 ) ) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p',cTHM270_pme) ).

thf(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1: a > b,X2: a > c,X3: b > c] :
        ( ( ! [X4: a] :
              ( ( X3 @ ( X1 @ X4 ) )
              = ( X2 @ X4 ) )
          & ! [X5: b] :
            ? [X4: a] :
              ( ( X1 @ X4 )
              = X5 )
          & ! [X4: a,X6: a] :
              ( ( X1 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
              = ( c_starb @ ( X1 @ X4 ) @ ( X1 @ X6 ) ) )
          & ! [X4: a,X7: a] :
              ( ( X2 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X7 ) )
              = ( c_starc @ ( X2 @ X4 ) @ ( X2 @ X7 ) ) ) )
       => ! [X8: b,X5: b] :
            ( ( X3 @ ( c_starb @ X8 @ X5 ) )
            = ( c_starc @ ( X3 @ X8 ) @ ( X3 @ X5 ) ) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[cTHM270_pme]) ).

thf(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X24: a,X25: b,X27: a,X28: a,X29: a,X30: a] :
      ( ( ( esk3_0 @ ( esk1_0 @ X24 ) )
        = ( esk2_0 @ X24 ) )
      & ( ( esk1_0 @ ( esk4_1 @ X25 ) )
        = X25 )
      & ( ( esk1_0 @ ( c_stara @ X27 @ X28 ) )
        = ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X27 ) @ ( esk1_0 @ X28 ) ) )
      & ( ( esk2_0 @ ( c_stara @ X29 @ X30 ) )
        = ( c_starc @ ( esk2_0 @ X29 ) @ ( esk2_0 @ X30 ) ) )
      & ( ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ esk5_0 @ esk6_0 ) )
       != ( c_starc @ ( esk3_0 @ esk5_0 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ esk6_0 ) ) ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])]) ).

thf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: a,X6: a] :
      ( ( esk1_0 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
      = ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) @ ( esk1_0 @ X6 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X5: b] :
      ( ( esk1_0 @ ( esk4_1 @ X5 ) )
      = X5 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: a] :
      ( ( esk3_0 @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) )
      = ( esk2_0 @ X4 ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: a,X5: b] :
      ( ( esk1_0 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ ( esk4_1 @ X5 ) ) )
      = ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) @ X5 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: a,X6: a] :
      ( ( esk2_0 @ ( c_stara @ X4 @ X6 ) )
      = ( c_starc @ ( esk2_0 @ X4 ) @ ( esk2_0 @ X6 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X5: b] :
      ( ( esk2_0 @ ( esk4_1 @ X5 ) )
      = ( esk3_0 @ X5 ) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_4]) ).

thf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X4: a,X5: b] :
      ( ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ ( esk1_0 @ X4 ) @ X5 ) )
      = ( c_starc @ ( esk2_0 @ X4 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ X5 ) ) ),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),c_0_8]) ).

thf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ esk5_0 @ esk6_0 ) )
   != ( c_starc @ ( esk3_0 @ esk5_0 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ esk6_0 ) ) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).

thf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X5: b,X8: b] :
      ( ( c_starc @ ( esk3_0 @ X5 ) @ ( esk3_0 @ X8 ) )
      = ( esk3_0 @ ( c_starb @ X5 @ X8 ) ) ),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_4]),c_0_8]) ).

thf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem    : ALG298^5 : TPTP v8.2.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command    : run_E %s %d THM
% 0.13/0.34  % Computer : n003.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34  % CPULimit   : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % WCLimit    : 300
% 0.13/0.34  % DateTime   : Sat May 18 23:38:53 EDT 2024
% 0.13/0.35  % CPUTime    : 
% 0.20/0.49  Running higher-order theorem proving
% 0.20/0.50  Running: /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/eprover-ho --delete-bad-limit=2000000000 --definitional-cnf=24 -s --print-statistics -R --print-version --proof-object --auto-schedule=8 --cpu-limit=300 /export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/theBenchmark.p
% 0.20/0.51  # Version: 3.1.0-ho
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting new_bool_9 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting post_as_ho1 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting post_as_ho4 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting post_as_ho2 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting ehoh_best2_full_lfho with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting full_lambda_10 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting new_ho_8 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # post_as_ho12 with pid 26241 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Result found by post_as_ho12
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.51  # Search class: HUUPM-FFSF21-SSSFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51  # partial match(3): FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with pid 26250 completed with status 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Result found by U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing class: HSSSSMSSSSSNSSA.
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 8 strats onto 8 cores with 300 seconds (2400 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting post_as_ho12 with 300s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # No SInE strategy applied
% 0.20/0.51  # Search class: HUUPM-FFSF21-SSSFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51  # partial match(3): FUUPM-FFSF21-SFFFFFNN
% 0.20/0.51  # Scheduled 6 strats onto 1 cores with 300 seconds (300 total)
% 0.20/0.51  # Starting U----_102_C09_12_F1_SE_CS_SP_PS_S5PRR_RG_S04AN with 163s (1) cores
% 0.20/0.51  # Preprocessing time       : 0.001 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Presaturation interreduction done
% 0.20/0.51  
% 0.20/0.51  # Proof found!
% 0.20/0.51  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.20/0.51  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.20/0.51  # Parsed axioms                        : 7
% 0.20/0.51  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Initial clauses                      : 11
% 0.20/0.51  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 6
% 0.20/0.51  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 5
% 0.20/0.51  # Processed clauses                    : 17
% 0.20/0.51  # ...of these trivial                  : 1
% 0.20/0.51  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # ...remaining for further processing  : 15
% 0.20/0.51  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Backward-rewritten                   : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Generated clauses                    : 25
% 0.20/0.51  # ...of the previous two non-redundant : 19
% 0.20/0.51  # ...aggressively subsumed             : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Paramodulations                      : 25
% 0.20/0.51  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # NegExts                              : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Disequality decompositions           : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Total rewrite steps                  : 28
% 0.20/0.51  # ...of those cached                   : 12
% 0.20/0.51  # Propositional unsat checks           : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional check models        : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional check unsatisfiable : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional clauses             : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional clauses after purity: 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional unsat core size     : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional preprocessing time  : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional encoding time       : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Propositional solver time         : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Success case prop preproc time    : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Success case prop encoding time   : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  #    Success case prop solver time     : 0.000
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of processed clauses  : 10
% 0.20/0.51  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 10
% 0.20/0.51  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.20/0.51  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 12
% 0.20/0.51  # ...number of literals in the above   : 12
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Current number of archived clauses   : 5
% 0.20/0.51  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # BW rewrite match successes           : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.20/0.51  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 880
% 0.20/0.51  # Search garbage collected termcells   : 203
% 0.20/0.51  
% 0.20/0.51  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51  # User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.20/0.51  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Total time               : 0.005 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Maximum resident set size: 1776 pages
% 0.20/0.51  
% 0.20/0.51  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.20/0.51  # User time                : 0.002 s
% 0.20/0.51  # System time              : 0.006 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Total time               : 0.008 s
% 0.20/0.51  # Maximum resident set size: 1780 pages
% 0.20/0.51  % E---3.1 exiting
% 0.20/0.51  % E exiting
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------